Sudha Gupta vs State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 848 Jhar

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                               I.A. No.427 of 2020
                                     In
                               Cr.M.P No. 3235 of 2019
      1. Sudha Gupta
      2. Nirmal Kumar Sahu                               .... .... Petitioner(s).
                                     Versus
      1. State of Jharkhand
      2. Savitri Devi                                    .... .... Opposite Party(s)
                                    With
                               Cr.M.P No. 3266 of 2019
        Savitri Devi                                     .... .... Petitioner(s).
                                     Versus
        1.State of Jharkhand
        2. Sudha Gupta                           .... .... Opposite Party(s)

                            ------

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN.

THROUGH : VIDEO CONFERENCING

------

FOR THE PETITIONER(S) : Mr. Nikhilesh Kr. Chatterjee, Advocate FOR THE STATE : Ms. Niki Sinha, APP Mr. Abhay Kumar Tiwari, APP FOR THE O.P No.2 : Mr. Shiv Prasad, Advocate

------

06/22.02.2021 The lawyers have no objection with regard to the proceeding, which has been held through video conferencing today at 11.00 A.M. They have no complaint in respect to the audio and video clarity and quality.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

FIR has been registered under Sections 406, 120B/34 IPC and interlocutory application has been filed being I.A. No. 427 of 2020 which is a joint compromise petition filed on behalf of the petitioners and the opposite party no.2.

Counsel for the petitioners and the opposite party no.2 submits that they have resolved their dispute thus the FIR and the entire criminal proceedings be quashed.

After hearing the parties, I find that the FIR was registered under Sections 406, 420, 120B & 34 IPC. Offence are compoundable in nature and a joint compromise petition has been filed by both the parties.

Further in Cr.M.P No. 3266 of 2019, FIR has been registered under Sections 467, 468, 419, 506/34 IPC which is not compoundable in nature but since the parties have resolved their dispute and it will be a futile exercise to put the accused on trial as invariably the prosecution cannot lead any positive evidence against the accused person.

In view of the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh vs State of Punjab & Anr. reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 & State of Madhya Pradesh vs Laxmi Narayan & Others reported in (2019) 5 SCC 688, I am inclined to allow these Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions. Consequently both the FIRs being Argora P.S. Case No. 227 of 2018 and Argora P.S. Case No. 196 of 2017 are quashed.

Both these petitions stand allowed.

I.A. No.427 of 2020

In view of the order passed in the main petitions, this interlocutory application stands allowed.

(ANANDA SEN , J) anjali/ C.P 3